DIOGENES: In Search Of An Honest Politician!

DIOGENES invites you to pull up a chair on this rainy day and read
posts from around the world.
The writing may lean to the right...but that's the way Diogenes wants it!
You may leave your opinion,
but Diogenes rarely changes his! WELCOME!

Shocked

In interviews with House Oversight Committee investigators, Cincinnati IRS
employees said that they believed that targeting of conservative groups came
from Washington, not from a couple of “rogue agents. “
Sunday the House Oversight Committee released partial transcripts of
Oversight Committee investigators’ interviews with unnamed Cincinnati IRS
employees, which contradicts the line coming from the White House.
“It’s impossible,” an IRS employee responded to an investigator’s question
about the allegations that the targeting of conservative groups was due to “two
‘rogue agents.” “As an agent we are controlled by many, many people. We have to
submit many, many reports. So the chance of two agents being rogue and doing
things like that could never happen.”
Answering a question about the employee’s reaction to news reports that the
targeting was contained in Cincinnati and the fault of the Cincinnati office,
the employee said that Washington has been throwing them under the bus.
“Well, it’s hard to answer the question because in my mind I still hear
people saying we were low‑level employees, so we were lower than dirt, according
to people in D.C. So, take it for what it is,” a Cincinnati IRS employee said.
“They were basically throwing us underneath the bus.”
The employee further noted that it was a supervisor who requested they do a
search for tea party and similar applications in March of 2010.
“Did [your supervisor] give you any indication of the need for the search,
any more context?” an investigator asked.
“He told me that Washington, D.C., wanted some cases,” the employee
responded, going on to answer that by April 2010 the group was handling fewer
than 40 cases and had sent seven cases to Washington, D.C.
When asked for the reason behind the request that cases be sent to
Washington, D.C. the employee responded, “He said Washington, D.C. wanted seven.
Because at one point I believe I heard they were thinking 10, but it came down
to seven. I said okay, seven.”
The employee explained that the Cincinnati office sent the first seven cases
that had come into the system.
The employee further noted that Washington, D.C. had additionally requested
the applications or parts of the applications for two specific groups.
Investigator: “But just to be clear, she told you the specific names of these
applicants.” IRS employee: “Yes.” Investigator: “And she told you that
Washington, D.C. had requested these two specific applications be sent to D.C.”
IRS employee: “Yes, or parts of them.”
According to the partial transcript, the employee noted that this was an
unusual request.
The employee added that the Cincinnati IRS employees were just following
orders and that the employee believed those instructions came from Washington,
D.C.
Investigator: “So is it your perspective that ultimately the responsible
parties for the decisions that were reported by the IG are not in the Cincinnati
office?” IRS employee: “I don’t know how to answer that question. I mean, from
an agent standpoint, we didn’t do anything wrong. We followed directions based
on other people telling us what to do.” Investigator: “And you ultimately
followed directions from Washington; is that correct?” IRS employee: “If
direction had come down from Washington, yes.” Investigator: “But with respect
to the particular scrutiny that was given to Tea Party applications, those
directions emanated from Washington; is that right?” IRS employee: “I believe
so.”
Another interviewee, described by the Oversight Committee as a more senior
IRS employee, complained about micromanagement from Washington, D.C. that
ultimately led the employee to apply for another job in July 2010.
“It was the whole Tea Party. It was the whole picture. I mean, it was the
micromanagement. The fact that the subject area was extremely sensitive and it
was something that I didn’t want to be associated with,” the more senior IRS
employee told an investigator who was asking about his decision to find another
job.
The more senior employee added that what was going on was “inappropriate.”
Investigator: “Why didn’t you want to be associated with it?” IRS employee:
“For what happened now. I mean, rogue agent? Even though I was taking all my
direction from EO Technical [Washington, D.C], I didn’t want my name in the
paper for being this rogue agent for a project I had no control over.”
Investigator: “Did you think there was something inappropriate about what was
happening in 2010?” IRS employee: “Yes. The inappropriateness was not processing
these applications fairly and timely.”
Sunday, Committee Chairman Darrell Issa unveiled that committee’s findings on
CNN, promised that the full transcripts will come out, and called White House
spokesman Jay Carney a “paid liar.”

GSA Blows Quarter Billion Dollars on Breaking Lease; Lies to Congress About It

Just a few blocks away from Nationals Park the federal government holds a
below-market lease at 2100 2nd Street, SW, Washington D.C.
The 600,000 square foot lease doesn’t expire until May 15, 2018 and is valued
at least $48 million in rent and likely represents another $40 million in
savings below market rates for commercial real estate.
But, in a time of tight budgets, when taxes have been raised on all Americans
to support Washington’s addiction to spending, bureaucrats at the General
Services Administration (GSA) have decided to…wait… abandon the cost-effective
space, move the employees to a new, higher rent building and pay rent on the
vacated building; at the cost to taxpayers of at least $250 million according to
sources familiar with the terms of the lease.
And we wonder why the government has such a tough time cutting their budget
while having such an easy cutting our household budgets through taxes?
Sources close to Capitol Hill, however, say there is growing outrage over
this specific illustration of the waste of more than $250 million taxpayer
dollars.
“The GSA is making a major mistake by neglecting to take advantage of
existing below market lease rates for an extended term. It is outrageous that
they simply seem to be ignoring a significant cost savings to the taxpayer,”
said a source close to Congress. “This is a time we all need to be exercising
prudent fiscal responsibility, a basic responsibility of the GSA. They have
dropped the ball and had better pick it up soon”.
I guess that’s the reason why the GSA has suddenly gone all “Eric Holder” on
Congress, testifying to the House subcommittee responsible for the oversight of
federal real estate that the broken lease won’t cost taxpayers a dime, when in
fact the opposite seems true.
From the Washington
Business Journal:
The federal government will be on the hook for at least $30 million in
lease payments for the Coast Guard's current Buzzard Point headquarters after
the agency moves to St. Elizabeths later this year, according to sources
familiar with terms of the agency's lease with Monday Properties Inc.That would contradict congressional testimony from Dorothy Robyn, public
buildings service commissioner for the General Services Administration, who told
a House subcommittee May 22 that the federal government has an early termination
clause with Monday and will not owe any rent.Sources say the Coast Guard is allowed to terminate its Buzzard Point
lease in May 2015, meaning the government would have to pay the lease term until
then. There remains disagreement over how much that exposure would be: Some
sources say it would be $30 million, while others say it will be as high as $60
million.
That’s not just Contempt of Congress- or even perjury- that’s Contempt of
Common Sense, Taxpayers, Economics and, most likely, at least a minor violation
of Einstein’s concept of space-time.
Negotiated in 2008, the lease is estimated to save the government at least
$14 per square foot in a real estate market that often fetches $50 per square
foot for commercial property. For all intents and purposes, the lease is a
shrewd one to hold at a time that the government is trying to save a few
dollars.
“Not only is the remaining 18 months of vacant/wasted space a problem,” said
a person familiar with the lease, “but also that GSA foolishly terminated early
a major federal asset that it had for years into the future – very cheap space
that is perfectly well suited for numerous federal requirements. This is
possibly the most foolish of all GSA blunders, and hurts the taxpayers the
most.”
The government could save a lot of taxpayer dollars if it continued to occupy
the building including:
· $60 million in lease liability in an unoccupied building
· $40 million they already spent in infrastructure improvements
· $140-280 million in savings by extending the terms already
negotiated at below market rates.
Because of the below-market deal negotiated in 2008, instead of moving
out, the government should be moving more people in.
I know we see this type of government waste every day – but hundreds of
millions of dollars are going to be wasted by keeping this building unoccupied –
an outrage for sure.
But unlike a lot of other government outrages, this one can still be
remedied.
Congress? Can you hear us?
Because someone has been taking “Eric Holder” lessons from you.

Fascism of the United States of America

The federal government appears to think that it has the right to tell people
what to do and how to do it. When citizens fail to comply, this same government
believes it has the right to force those citizens to comply through
intimidation, force, or both. We have been hearing a great deal about this of
late and it shows no sign of letting up.
With the revelations that the IRS was targeting and even intimidating Tea
Party and other conservative groups, it has become obvious that our government –
or at least facets of it – stand opposed to conservatism. In doing so, whether
they are willing to admit it or not, they also stand against the values upon
which this nation was founded, especially the rule of law created by the
Constitution and Bill of Rights.
For generations, it was clear that conservatism was the hallmark of
constitutional law, mirrored throughout society. The changes that have taken
place in society as far back as the 1960s (or to FDR’s presidency depending upon
how a person views things) make it clear that since the inception of America,
conservative, traditional values defined America.
This has accelerated to the point where the New Left has obviously been
working very hard to rewrite history. This has been done by either attempting to
stamp the truth out or by giving history a new meaning altogether.
Fascism can be defined as “A system of government marked by centralization of
authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the
opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent
nationalism and racism.” This is merely one definition. There are many, but even
with all those definitions, there are things which remain the same among all of
them.

Let’s be vigilant as more sludge bubbles to the top. We need to
keep the issues alive, not allow them to sink back to the bottom.
The sludge has already bubbled to the top - there is no higher position than
the one usurped by that puddle of moral sludge - but I agree with keeping the
issues alive.

The Smoking Gun in Plain Sight (Obama and the demonization of conservatives)

Study history, and you will understand why no such document is ever likely to
be found: That just isn't how these things work. Very few people are aware of
this, but there is no document -- not one -- linking Adolf Hitler to the
Holocaust. Why not? Because Hitler didn't need to sign a document ordering the
slaughter of six million Jews. All he needed to do was to demonize his enemy in
speeches at the Reichstag, on the radio, and from one end of Germany to the
other -- then hire thugs like Herman Goering, Heinrich Himmler, Adolf Eichmann,
and Josef Goebbels. They knew what der Fuhrer wanted, and der Fuhrer knew he
could trust his henchman to get the job done -- no matter how, no matter what
may be the law -- and to not bother him with the gory details.
Reader, take a deep breath. Nowhere in this essay will I suggest, or even
imply, that President Obama plans the mass murder of his opponents the way
Hitler murdered his. That's absurd. I am merely pointing out that President
Obama has been going about the business of demonizing his political enemies, and
then hiring thugs to destroy them without regard to the law, in precisely the
same way that Hitler and his fascists did it in Germany. This isn't an
accusation; it's an observation.
Look at the record: From the moment he took office in January 2009, President
Obama has spoken before Congress, on television, and at countless rallies across
the country describing his political opponents in terms we haven't seen before
in the United States. Time and again he's insisted that Republicans aren't
merely wrong, but evil.

Killing the Dreams Soldiers Died to Preserve

On Memorial Day, tears were shed as programs across the country honored and
prayed for those men and women who sacrificed their dreams in order that we
might live out our own. Some Americans who had lost a son or daughter, a spouse,
or a parent never got to see their loved one reach their full potential. Those
soldiers who died left their dreams in their graves.
Their loss is made even worse by an administration that is doing all it can
to kill the dreams of Americans they fought to preserve. President Obama's plan
for creating jobs takes more and more money from private citizens and companies
so that his administration can hire more government workers and fund more
government projects. This funds President Obama's dream, not yours.
Many complain that conservatives only want to protect "the rich." It's not
the rich that conservatives need to protect. The truly wealthy will take care of
themselves. They can move resources, relocate companies, and shelter income to
avoid the worst machinations of Washington's tax policies.
Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary because he receives
no salary. He doesn't need a salary. His extensive investments feed his
lifestyle and fund his future investments. Government taxes investment income at
a lower level to encourage savings and the capital investment all economies
need.
President Obama's assault on the top 2% of wage owners is not a punishment on
the truly wealthy; it's an assault on the "new rich." His taxes hit those
successful entrepreneurs who invested in their own idea, worked hard, created
jobs, and reaped the benefits of their success. Instead of being honored and
rewarded, they watch as Washington takes more and more of their earned reward.
At a time many would want to expand their companies, ObamaCare and increased
government regulations have just increased their costs.
The gap between the average "rich" and "poor" American may have grown, but
the "new rich" do not easily stay rich. In the 2007 Treasury Study--"Income
Mobility in the US from 1996 to 2005," the biggest losses in income came not
from the poor but from the wealthiest income earners. The top 1% of income
earners in 1996 had their incomes halved by 2005. They were not getting ahead at
the expense of others; many lost ground.
Those aspiring to reach their dream, the top 20% of wage earners watched
their income increase a mere ten percent. Those Americans originally in the
bottom 20 percent saw a 91 percent increase in income. This is missed in many
statistics because such increases move people out of the lowest 20 percent. In
short, there is no permanent underclass or overclass. People can still succeed,
but President Obama is doing everything he can to punish those Americans who do!
He isn't punishing "old wealth”; he's punishing "new wealth." He doesn't
bring down the wealthy; he keeps out those trying to become wealthy. Abraham
Lincoln knew the value of preserving the American Dream: “I don’t believe in a
law to prevent a man from getting rich; it would do more harm than good. So
while we do not propose any war on capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man
an equal chance to get rich with everybody else.”
Though often wrongly attributed to Abraham Lincoln, it was William John Henry
Boetcker, an American religious leader and influential public speaker, who first
penned "The Ten Cannots:" "You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging
thrift. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help
little men by tearing down big men. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling
down the wage payer. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot
establish sound security on borrowed money. You cannot further the brotherhood
of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more
than you earn. You cannot build character and courage by destroying men's
initiative and independence. And you cannot help men permanently by doing for
them what they can and should do for themselves."
Lincoln and Boetcker understood what President Obama and his fellow class
warriors just don’t understand. In a country that is built on personal
achievement and free enterprise, there need be no war between capital and labor.
When America is working its magic, capital and labor are the same people at
different stages of their lives. Workers work to save, then to invest, and
ultimately to become owners of capital themselves. They want opportunity not
more government programs designed to keep them dependent.
Though we should never forget those who gave their lives that we might have
the freedom to dream, may we do what we can to ensure that this and future
generations can still profit from the dreams those soldiers died to preserve.

U.S. Rep. Joe Garcia (D not shown by CNN) said Saturday he was saddened and disappointed by
absentee ballot fraud allegations leveled against his former chief of staff.

The congressman said at a press conference he asked for the staffer’s
resignation and called for fixes to the “flawed voter absentee process” which
left the system vulnerable.

Garcia said he demanded the resignation of chief of staff Jeffrey Garcia (no
relation, according to local media reports), then fired him shortly after
learning of the allegations Friday afternoon.

No fraudulent ballots were cast as a result of this alleged plot, the
congressman said.

“I’ve asked an attorney to investigate what went on and interview the people.
I have asked all of my staff to fully cooperate with any investigation,” he
said. “Here’s the good part about this — from my conversations thus far, no
ballots were tampered with, no ballots were touched.

A Pattern of Perjury

Even the most ardent liberal defenders of Eric Holder acknowledge that the
embattled Attorney General "is in a mess of his own making," as Dana Milbank of
the Washington
Postput it.
Under fire for his Justice Department going after AP reporters' personal
records, Holder testified in May 2013 to
Congress: "With regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure
of material, that is not something that I have ever been involved in, heard of,
or would think would be a wise policy."
But, Holder was caught in a lie when the Washington
Post exposed an affidavit bearing Holder's signature naming Fox News
reporter James Rosen as a "co-conspirator" in a 2009 foreign espionage case.
Holder then went "judge shopping." Rejected by two federal judges, a
third judge finally granted Holder's covert targeted request. The DOJ
traced Rosen's movements, his calls, his personal e-mails, even his
parents' phone records.
Recognizing that Holder's actions belie his claim that targeting reporters
was "not something that I have ever been involved in," the two top ranking
members of the House Judiciary Committee have written a
letter to Holder looking for answers. Politely pointing out that the media
reports and DOJ documents uncovered in the case "appear to be at odds with your
sworn testimony before the (Judiciary) Committee," Chairman Bob Goodlatte and
James Sensenbrenner, Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Investigations, then list
a page and half of questions for which they want answers by June 5.
As the worm turns and a perjury case builds against the Attorney General, it
is worth noting that this is hardly the first time Holder has crossed the line
between truth and fiction with Congress. In fact, it started almost immediately
after he took office.
On Election Day 2008, members of the New Black Panther Party in paramilitary
garb wielded night sticks and intimidated voters at a
Philadelphia polling location with threatening racial slurs. The DOJ's
attorneys in the Voting Right Division obtained a default judgment against the
thugs in what
has been called "perhaps the most clear cut case of voter suppression and
intimidation ever." Just prior to sentencing, however, the DOJ dropped
the prosecution with barely a slap on the wrist for the Panthers.
In March 2011, Holder was questioned about his involvement in the decision by
a Congressional Committee
and said that the "decisions made in the New Black Panther Party case were
made by career attorneys in the department."
That was not true. As part of an effort to get at the truth, Judicial Watch
filed a Freedom of Information lawsuit in U.S. District Court. Among the
findings, the court
ruled that, "The documents reveal that political appointees within DOJ were
conferring about the status and resolution of the New Black Panther Party case
in the days preceding the DOJ’s dismissal of claims in that case."
J. Christian Adams, a career attorney in the Voting Rights Section of DOJ
that prosecuted the New Black Panther case testified before the U.S. Civil
Rights Commission that it was in fact Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli, an
Obama political appointee and top aid to Holder, who overruled the unanimous
recommendation for full prosecution by Adams and his colleagues.
Another lie involved the Fast and Furious scandal wherein the Administration
"walked" hundreds of highly lethal weapons into the hands of the ultra-violent
Mexican drug cartel. Some of those weapons were eventually linked to the
assassination of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.
Rep.Darrell
Issa grilled Holder in a House Oversight Committee hearing in May of 2011;
"When did you first know about the program officially I believe called Fast and
Furious? To the best of your knowledge, what date?" Holder replied, "I'm not
sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the
first time over the last few weeks."
That was not true. As Sharyl
Attkisson of CBS News and many others reported, a July 2010 memo – ten
months before the Congressional hearing – to Holder from the head of the
National Drug Intelligence Center briefed the AG that through F&F "1500
firearms were then supplied to the Mexican drug trafficking cartels."
Attkisson documented at least six additional briefings between July and
November 1, 2010 to Holder about F&F including from Holder's Assistant
Attorney General Lanny Breuer.
Holder has defended himself by suggesting that he didn't understand Issa's
question, and that he meant to say a "couple months" instead of "weeks."
The President continues to stand by his man, at least publicly. "The
President thinks the Attorney General is doing a good job, and he has confidence
in the Attorney General,"according
to White House Spokesman Jay Carney.
New Black Panthers, Fast and Furious, and Rosen-Fox News – three
strikes should be enough to call Eric Holder out. Regardless of Obama's feigned
"absolute confidence" in Holder, look for a resignation by July 4.